| XBK Chat (unofficial archive) A meeting place for past members of Brahma Kumaris
FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups
Profile You have no new messages Log out
child abuse in brahma kumaris Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
| XBK Chat Forum Index -> XBK discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author | Message
--- | ---
casa Joined: 24 Apr 2004 Posts: 12 |
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 12:55 am Post subject: |
I have only time to read about half your post Eromain, but continue to applaud your commitment. The change process in the bks is extraordinarily challenging - which I always find interesting given that transformation is the bk 'core business'. Yet I can't point the finger as much as I'd like to (or used to), as I see in myself the same 'hanging on' that is simply magnified within the institution. Before I duck out, I wanted to respond briefly to something you and gyaniwasi have brought up.
Quote:
I think you have identified here a deep theme of the Raja Yoga mindset –because this is God’s organisation it cannot do wrong. I think this is a mistake even in Raja Yoga terms
I think one of the biggest mistakes that has been made in this journey of transformation is to misunderstand Raj Yoga/the yagya and the Brahma Kumaris. If one accepts raj yoga is the link with god (and I am aware that many don't) then this is the real yagya, the real fire that is transforming the world... soul by soul... stretching the membrane of what was into what is becoming. When the beliefs get distorted and the Brahma Kumaris becomes god's institution, where nothing is wrong and nothing can be challenged... there are real problems. The BKs are human beings with very real limitations, often pretending as well as possible to be perfect. This is dysfunction. To believe this is 'god' is ludicrous. However, to hope that a good many of these people, who are not caught in the above illusion, are quietly, humbly bringing in the fire of purity, love and bliss to our world - for me is a worthwhile hope. Certainly my experience of some bks is that this is what their gift is to the world. I always thought that if we really stoked the 'yagya', then it would likely burn the institution... let's face it, who really wants or needs to be institutionalised? Love, friendship, connection, security, partnership... yes. Institutionalisation... definitely not. Must run... off to see Touching the Void.
hanuman Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 174 |
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:04 am Post subject: Child Abuse |
Eugene. I am glad that other souls can see false basis of the attacks by teachers against their students in the name of Shrimath. I do not want to recount some of the other negatives some teachers had cast at me as stones. If I did, I would appear as though I have made these negatives into a mala which I wear for all in the spiritual world to see. Instead, I have with the power of the Great Alchemist, converted the stones of negative comdemnation and converted them into precious gems of wisdom to share with my brothers and sisters. When teachers' behaviors are inconsistent with SB's teachings, I would always give them the benefit of the doubt and ensure I protect myself and others from the damaging behaviors. One protection against the attacks is clear heart. If it is clean, that helps! To the body conscious BKs, you will be seen as a trouble maker. To SB and many seniors who think out of the box, you will be respected as a great reformer, not a shudra. Many seniors are still married to their egos. It will be sometime before they understand that a soul because of his talent was an instrument of SB to do some house cleaning. There is still more house cleaning to be done in other sectors. Some seniors will ensure that other parts of the house are clean before SB or the public informs them that there is a need for spring cleaning. _________________ Om Shanti, To my brothers and sisters. Love to you all, Errol bhai
eromain Joined: 16 Jun 2004 Posts: 30 |
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 7:58 am Post subject: to Kevin |
Eromain to Kevin, Thanks for your contribution. I look forward to your responses to the core issues of the report when you get to them. I suspect based upon your postings so far you have not got to the appendices yet, and I would be interested to hear your responses when you do. eugene
eromain Joined: 16 Jun 2004 Posts: 30 |
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 8:01 am Post subject: Eromain to S13 |
S13 Although S13’s initial post was removed by Admin I have decided to reply to it because of my belief that though his opinions have not been supported in this forum he may nevertheless represent the opinions of a significant number of BKs. As contained in your original posting on this thread your response to my report was as follows: Firstly you confidently asserted it was all my creation –which I take to mean either I have perpetrated a malicious fraud against the bks or I am insane. Maybe there is another meaning to ‘creation’ but I cannot think of it. Secondly you suggested I should leave the BKs completely if I disobey knowledge. In your second posting you seemed to advocate forgetting about the whole subject. And I believe you apologised for telling me to leave, but I am not quite sure on this as you are unclear. Your first posting has been removed from the thread and as it was libellous I think you owe Admin a debt of gratitude for this. But as you may not be alone in either assuming I am a liar or wishing to ignore the whole matter, I would like to respond anyway if I may. And as you called me a liar I think I may. It took 5 years of correspondence to gather an incontrovertible body of evidence about what the BK organisation’s current commitment to child protection is. Evidence not produced by me or by you, but by the senior administrators of the organisation in their own words, on their headed paper, writing official letters as the official spokespeople of the institution. I did not wear a secret microphone and catch them unawares. I wrote and insisted that they reply not on behalf of themselves but on behalf of the organisation. In terms of time my strategy was expensive. It took 5 years, which perhaps could have been better spent. Perhaps if I had broken the silence surrounding these matters back there might be children (and indeed adults) who are currently being abused who would not have been. I do not know if I made the right decision, and I confess to some disquiet that amongst the people who are currently confidentially contacting me with stories of their abuse there will be someone whose abuse started after 1999. I have in the past wondered what I might say to them if they challenge me why I did not break the silence sooner. Do you mind if I show them your postings? Do you mind if I say that I did not speak sooner because of Brahmins like you who will not believe the words of victims whatever they say and however they say it. There are Bks who will believe nothing unless their seniors tell them. This is a shame as I don’t know where in Raja Yoga it tells you to stop thinking for yourself. Anyway given that this is the unfortunate reality I got the seniors to produce the proof in their own words, because unlike you they could not deny it. But you will not even believe your own seniors. My request to you is simple. Ask Dadi Janki, Sr Jayanti, Dadi Prakashmani and Dadi Kulzar. Email them today and post the responses you get on this site. I think you will agree that these matters are so serious that you have this responsibility. But let me also ask you this: When they have persuaded you what will you do then? Is the matter over and should we all just forget about it as you seem to advocate in your second posting? Perhaps facing the facts will change things for you. What will you do? Will you be part of the problem or part of the solution? Perhaps telling people to leave because they have a complaint is an indulgence you will stop allowing yourself. Unfortunately some of the classic features of cultures in which abuse flourishes were present in your postings: the knee-jerk denial even in the face of proof, the dismissal of both message and messenger and above all the magically transforming of the actuality of the abuse into a figment of someone’s imagination or into malicious lies. You have demonstrated in two tiny paragraphs what it took me many pages in my report to describe. It is because of your postings that I have been advising xbks who are victims of abuse to think twice before entering this site. And given that this site is essentially for xbks and certainly the only place I know of on line where they can hope for like-minded support I think that is a shame. Perhaps those practising bks who see this thread and who are inclined to show more respect will continue to voice such and all xbks can without trepidation or expectation of further insult come and receive the many supportive voices that are already here.
eromain Joined: 16 Jun 2004 Posts: 30 |
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 8:32 am Post subject: aussie site |
I will be posting an update of what has been happening fairly soon. in the meantime there has been a discussion on this subject at the following aussie bk forum http://brahmakumaris.com.au/php/forum//xbkchat/index.html"gensmall">
hanuman Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 174 |
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 2:59 am Post subject: Child abuse in the bk |
Eromain, Do not allow the walls of silence prevent you from doing Baba's work of house cleaning. The centers which do not respond today will do so tomorrow. Tomorrow, however, it may be too late for the center adminiatrators. If the house cleaning is not internal, the external cleaning will not be pleasant and fear. If law suits and charges are filed in the lokik legal system, how many bks in charge of centers will be supported by SB? Who will be paying the legal fees etc. _________________ Om Shanti, To my brothers and sisters. Love to you all, Errol bhai
Guest |
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 4:59 pm Post subject: |
Indeed hanuman. And this is not the power of silence in a positive way. I would rather call it the power of arrogance. The topic on the official bk forum of Australia remains there to stand, although there was discomfort from members and the co-admin. The issue they had concerned "disservice". I only have one answer to this: the bkwsu couldn't have done a better service to themselves and towards the outside world then to openly address this issue and dynamically seek for solutions. They have chosen not to do so, and they turned their back to such an opportunity. This behaviour is certainly no suprise from people who have future kingdoms (with them being king!) and subjects in mind, and NOT a better world as they would like to let people believe. Behind the fake yogi smile is hidden great arrogance and disrespect. No reputation can misguide the law of karma. Cause sorrow, and sorrow you shall get.
hanuman Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 174 |
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 11:04 pm Post subject: Child Abuse in the BK |
Kevin, The BKs have to remember that as long as they have karmic accounts to settle, Baap-Dada will not get involved! They will simply be observers when the law suits are filed. To them, the BKs, it may seem strange. They'll want to know: How is it that God Almighty is not defending and supporting His children? It is not His negative karma of child abuse, though it was done by individuals representing him. That's when the BKs will have a crisis of faith. The social and psychological fall out can be worse than the misconduct of child abuse. As you mentioned, the negative wall of arrogance will preclude the individual(s) from seeking assistance. For them, the psychologists and social workers are following manmath. The advice of non-gyani souls are worth less than cowrie shells, according to many BKs. As corrupt as the Yadav and Kaurav Governments are, they will not tolerate, politically and socially, a Pnadav Government, which is callous to acts of child abuse by members. _________________ Om Shanti, To my brothers and sisters. Love to you all, Errol bhai
gyaniwasi Joined: 22 Feb 2004 Posts: 167 |
Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2004 6:11 pm Post subject: |
Response to Eromain Eromain, Please forgive the extended wait for this reply but I was caught up in other mundane matters and though I check the site every week I don’t always respond to posts immediately. I guess I just try to see things as clearly as I can before commenting. Not the best habit for a chat site I admit but then the issues posted here can be so complex and intriguing (especially when one observes the ‘revisionist’ posts and degrees of contradiction) that I hesitate to comment before making careless or light remarks. That’s just my style. Anyway, I finally completed reading your report and made about 3 pages of comments based on the last 40 pages of it. I thought of sending these to you privately but then in fairness to those who take this issue seriously I think it best to post a synopsis of them here before responding to your last reply to me. First of all - following through on my first response to your report - I think it very important and potentially complex in implications your extension of focus on child abuse from physical to emotional dimensions coupled with your ‘intention to start a legal counseling fund if no action is taken by BK centres.’ T’s letter eloquently articulates the experience of emotional abuse of children when he writes:
Quote:
I feel that my spirit has been crushed, and I see that in so many of my compadres who are still BKs. I feel like a wild horse that has been tamed and now can only run for its rider and cannot run free for itself. It feels like I have to fight for my own freedom. This is a battle within myself. But the BKs work within you, never that overtly. I was never tamed with a whip, but with sweet guilt-ridden words. The passion, the verve for life and creativity that I see in many “normal” people I never had. It felt hard to do anything for myself. Often people would say that I was wasting my life, but I had no drive. I thought that to work or study was a waste of time when I could be doing “service”. These ideas made me lost and confused. Everything seemed hopeless or pointless.(pp.94-95)
That ‘abuse’ extends into adult life and leads to what you describe earlier:
Quote:
There is amongst many ex-Brahmins a feeling of deep disappointment at what they believe is a callous and hypocritical disregard on the part of your organisation to the many real difficulties and issues faced by current and past-raja yoga practitioners. Problems which you take no noticeable responsibility for .... Many of these difficulties are extremely serious –depression, physical abuse, spousal violence, psycho-sexual problems, depression, marital break-ups, parent-child estrangement, attempted suicide and actual suicide.
These are strong words of indictment but you seem confident about evidence for this judging from your comment:
Quote:
You know much better than me that there are many more letters about many more incidents I could be writing to you. For every such incident I know of, and believe me there are many, no doubt you know a hundredfold. And for every one of those hundredfold events there are thousands others of which you have no knowledge. But which you should (p.57).
This extensive concept of ‘abuse’ coupled with and endorsed by the description of Forms of Abuse adopted by the institution and which acknowledges that ‘Abuse is caused not only by those who actually perpetrate it but also by those who fail to prevent it or who condone, minimise or tolerate it (p.79)’ put the institution in a precarious position. For instance, Clause C of Emotional Abuse states:
Quote:
C Emotional abuse occurs when adults fail to show due care and attention or threaten, use sarcasm, taunt or shout at a child causing him or her to lose self confidence or self esteem or become nervous or withdrawn. It may also take place when an adult repeatedly ignores or fails to respond to a child's efforts or places the child under undue pressure to meet unrealistically high standards or expectations (p.80).
If we consider this in conjunction with the basic psychological and cultural thrust of the organization (during its pre-revisionist phase) to convert its adherents to ‘Baba’s obedient children’ then we are faced with the weighty issue of responsibility for profound psychological programming in cults and the consequences listed by you as mentioned above. Clause E also has implications for both children and adults:
Quote:
E Abuse of trust takes place where a child is indoctrinated with attitudes, which are unacceptable, to the child's family or guardian or if an adult misuses his or her power over a child (p.80).
I need not go into these matters here. There are those who have studied and documented them very thoroughly. I need only refer to Kramer and Alstad’s work The Guru Papers referred to by Ifegenia under the post “The Bottom Line”. They have thoroughly examined the issue of abuse of authority as part of a larger work in progress entitled Control. In passing, I would recommend it to any xbk who finds himself or herself teetering on the rim of the circle or has fallen out of it. T has aptly described part of the machinations of such control in the context of the Brahma Kumaris when he reflects:
Quote:
Destruction has been an important part of my upbringing and it has done nothing but damage. It can only fuel hopelessness, fear, panic, guilt and pain. How was I supposed to be able to do anything worthwhile with my life if it was all to be over soon? …. There was no point to studying, as I heard so often, but then working in an underpaid “office job” was okay. Why? Was it only money that was worthwhile for the institution? Could they not be offered anything else? Was my spirit not enough? As far as I could see, both studying and working occupied your time when you should be preparing to die. The BKs taught me how to die, not how to live(91).
A central point in the issue of emotional abuse is what Kramer and Alstad refer to as the erosion of self-trust as a prelude to surrendering to the guru. As T remarks:
Quote:
When you join the BKs you are handing over your “self sovereignty”; . . . .“You should always say ‘Yes’”, “you are an instrument of Baba”, “surrender your intellect”, are comments that I would often hear. What do these do to you? Take everything away.
I highlight these points to illustrate the potential complexity of legal action. If such action is taken and extended to the adult sphere then it would set a remarkable precedent for class action against various institutions and cults which practise subtle and overt forms of indoctrination and thought control, most notable of which would be the church’s doctrine of Hell and Damnation for ‘unbelievers’ as a ploy for retaining ‘believers’ within its fold. Of course I’m not saying such action should not be pursued - ‘God forbid’ its necessity – but if it is we could see something of the character of people suing the tobacco giants for lung cancer or people suing MacDonald’s for their obesity! [ I’m subject to correction] In all this I still maintain that the responsibility will ultimately lead to the originator of the BK system since, unlike the God of other religions, he is here to answer for himself on his edicts. No amount of shifting of blame from the transcendental to the earthly plane can entirely free him of involvement when he has said that he is in charge of the centres through his instruments. When a Government is found to be corrupt then the Prime Minister resigns, and if the PM himself orders an investigation and it is not properly conducted leaving his government’s credibility at stake then where should the people place their vote of confidence? This leads me to the question of accountability under Clause 4 of Dealing with Possible Abuse (p.80). This clause can nullify any potential complaint in relation clauses C and E of Forms of Abuse since that clause distinguishes between ‘poor teaching practice’ and ‘abuse’. The question therefore arises: can the officially appointed (presumably non-BK) Children’s Officer monitor teaching interactions to distinguish between ‘poor teaching’ and ‘child abuse’? If so, how can that system be implemented practically when – according to the experiences and perceptions contained in your report - the very teachings of the organization can be construed in terms of child abuse? Another point related to this falls under Clause 5 of The Children’s Officer . There seems to be a bit of a loophole here in the statement: 5 The Children's Officer will be responsible for initiating action where any abuse is suspected or alleged, keeping confidential all information on any matters referred to him or her but making such information available to the BKWSU's Trustees, the social services or police as necessary, while also being mindful of possible remedies and/or ramifications (p.81). [my italics] The italicized phrase implies an obligation on the part of the officer to make a concession partial to the offending party. This loophole is widened considerable when taken in the context of the Indian CPP which – as you note - is closely modeled on that of the UK. Whereas the UK CPP seems open to employing an outsider as its Children’s Officer the Indian CPP unambiguously places the responsibility with ‘the institution’s officer-in-charge’. This begs the question: should an institution accused of a misdemeanor be its own investigator? In view of the incidents alluded to in your report and the very cause of the report one must confess that this is indeed inadequate. Now I’d like to look at some of T’s comments in his retrospection but before commenting on this I think you’d do us a great service if you encourage his participation on this site. He seems sufficiently mature to deal with the kind of ‘sg13’ remarks you wish to protect others from. This forum, from what I understand, was also set up for people like T and others who might have suffered abuse. Granted that we do not have professional advice (no doctor-in-the-house) it is a general experience that talking helps. It matters to have a support group that can empathize. So it might be useful to reconsider your position. I think T is right when he says:
Quote:
I would like to point out that the BKs do not have a monopoly on meditation, trance-states, possession and voices from god or visions. They are ubiquitous throughout the cultures of the world and anyone can access deeper spiritual modes through penance, extenuating circumstances, hallucinogens or whatever(p.94).
Apart from the knowledge, it was the mystique of the encounter that attracted many of us Westerners, especially the power of the ‘egregore’ (which I intend to return to in another post). And it was interesting to observe the extent of his detachment in the statement following:
Quote:
I was relieved to find that I can still access my spiritual side without walking into GCH, and without imagining Brahma’s face. Truth and spirituality can be found everywhere, by their very definition, and not just in the small world of the BKs (94).
Yet, in spite of this, I note his ambivalence when he remarks soon after:
Quote:
I used to say that if all the BKs disappeared and GCH was destroyed, I would still have my spirituality. And now I am finding out how hard that really is. Effectively I have created that situation for myself and it is hard to find my own spirituality, because I am still attached to the BKs and feel that I have to be there to be spiritual. That notion has been implanted in me as a child (p95).
That ambivalence is characteristic of the true xbk. Elsewhere on this site it is evident in much of what we say in various posts (check Casa’s post on “the head and the heart” for instance). Again, it is the residual power of the BK ‘egregore’ that continues to influence us. Like any power it can have both good and bad effects depending on its use – but as I said that is a matter for separate discussion. Fortunately, towards the end of his letter T arrives at the foundation for healing that we are all striving to build:
Quote:
I do believe that we are all ultimately responsible for our own lives, and I feel that by writing this letter I am accepting that responsibility and leaving some of the pain and confusion behind (p.101).
I’d like to return now to our discourse on my reaction to your report on the whole. T’s comments on the organization’s image is relevant to your whole thrust in publishing the report and what you hope to gain from it:
Quote:
As an organisation it seems totally obsessed with its own glorification. It must look good above all else. In doing this it has sold out all spirituality and become a commercial venture (p.96).
This makes clearer the point I raised about why, given its declaration of Authority the organization would be very reluctant to comply with your wishes. I had used the expression ‘by what measure of reasoning’ in an idiomatic sense but I see that you have wisely (and correctly) taken it seriously. Indeed, it is the axis upon which your whole position turns since it is definitely pivoted outside of the circle of BK beliefs (and yet I find it strange that you choose to avoid any discourse on their doctrine when that is so germane to your issue.) Your choice of using elementary logic “that ‘God’ agrees with me is a tool I will use to beat those who drag their feet etc” is quite relevant to an outsider but from their point of view you are outside of the privileged circle who ‘know God’ and therefore the interpretation of that agreement becomes ‘their prerogative.’ No ‘outsider’ can interpret God’s wishes for them! Why, that is ludicrous! Hence, it becomes normal or a matter of course that the organization should reserve the right to investigate and discipline itself. Kant’s “categorical imperatives” which would be deemed universal or relevant to mankind as a whole and on which your moral reasoning and expectations are built can be conveniently dispensed with by a conscience totally eclipsed by the conviction that it is absorbed by God and grounded in his knowledge. Hence if the child brought it on herself then so be it. You have to remember Eugene, that you are addressing – in ‘lokik terms’ – essentially fundamentalist BKs not revisionist BKs. Here on this site and to some extent on the Australian site you might get a sympathetic or liberal ear from revisionist BKs, xBKs and PBKs, each perhaps, for fundamentally different reasons. So far, you have been getting a token ear from the essentially fundamentalist BKs you have been addressing for reasons of prudence. ‘Their God’, as you would express it, seems to have advised this but how does this apparently casual attitude measure up against the whole purpose and urgency of the Yagye established by him and for which he comes expressly to Earth every 5000 years? How many times will SB /'Indra' have to throw ‘Narad’ out of his court? You yourself have asked that question. You have said
Quote:
If Raja Yoga contains universal truths and guidelines for good action and is an intelligent path, a path of knowledge as opposed to blind faith it must at least be open to an intelligent scrutiny of its own practices. I personally believe Raja Yoga has nothing to fear from such, indeed I think it can only benefit.
We might add to practices the word precepts but here again I am not so sure that the Raj Yoga yours and some other viewpoints on this site reflect is the same as that conceived by the official organization you are addressing. I think what we are witnessing is a process of evolution common to all religions and which we never expected to see in the BK's RY because of the supposed nature of its foundation. There is a tendency to revise RY when it does not measure up to its old and established edicts. Whenever questions arise over the foundations of its authority there is either an instinctive avoidance to address them or a deflection shifting blame to 'the seniors' and 'bad teachers.' Why? I am not convinced this excuse is invariably valid. We must remember that the very souls who are considered highly praiseworthy by Bapdada are the very ones with whom you have a running battle. To believe in the whole corpus of knowledge for purpose of maintaining faith and 'good yog' then conveniently discarding or modifying those aspects that seem incongruent - including those considered to be the best products of its creation; those who are 'put on show' to the world as 'beads of God's rosary' - is basically dishonest. You have said
Quote:
I believe that Raj Yoga is ultimately trying not to be a religion in which people mindlessly obey God
but I beg to differ there. RY is not a "come let us reason" religion; it is a "follow father/follow shrimat" religion which is epitomised by the anecdote I quoted in another post: on the question of Faith, Kumarka Dadi said "If Baba asked me to walk into the ocean I will do so without questioning". That is how this knowledge was first taught. It was only later and moreso now, over a quarter century after its establishment in the West, that we have begun to see this openly liberal attitude to which you refer and which is exemplified on this site. The SB who in the early 80's would reprimand a brother (during those days of personal meetings) for arguing with a sister-in-charge over the running of a centre and remind him that "I am running these centres" does not seem to be the same today judging from the liberal attitudes made apparent on this site. I'm just observing the changing times and how the yagye is being refashioned 'reflexively' while SB remains 'detached' from his work. I fear, Eugene, that the God you see placed above scrutiny and to whom you feel the BKs should 'in all good conscience' be accountable to is not the same God they are associated with. We live in an age where BKs are prepared to hold onto their convictions whether or not SB agrees but will still vouch that 'no doubt He is God Almighty'. You express the faith that
Quote:
a more intelligent tradition within Raja Yoga will find a way of working with me
but I wonder. Judging from the poor responses you've had so far and the example of a total shutout from a centre of Western liberal tradition within the movement, how much hope can you have? For Raj Yoga to respond to changes with the help of the world or for it to evolve with the world would seem like the tail wagging the dog. Even some of its strongest liberal adherents find it difficult to admit that it is a reflexive tradition subject to fundamental doctrinal evolution because to do so would be to question the veracity of its Originator - which is its "trump card". You have said:
Quote:
Raj Yoga Doctrine does not say that God controls every aspect of of it so that any faults that individually or collectively arise must be 'his' mistake.
Tricky point this. It is a great loophole through which the entire yagye can be thrown! 'Of course,' we might say, 'why not? Isn't God perfect? Surely all mistakes must reside with his instruments. There can be no bad workman here; the fault is always with the tools!' This explanation can work when the apprentices are left on their own (as in other religions) but when the Master himself is in the workshop supervising and directing then it's a different matter - that is why you yourself express hope in the fact that 'their God is on your side'. It is the immediacy and your faith in a 'perceived reality' on their part that is at work there. Sometime ago I attempted to address that issue in a post entitled "Messenger and the Message:The Seed and the Fruit". I'd like to see your response to it. In closing then, I'd like to return to some issues you have deliberately avoided because you see no relevance of it to your immediate concern. You say
Quote:
I do not know the details of the consultation process with the entity they believe takes charge of Dadi Kulzar’s body and who they believe is God. Whether that person is in effective charge and whether that person is God is beyond the remit of my report.
Yet, herein lies the crux of the matter: whether or not that personage is the Universal God reflected in Kant's moral imperatives will determine what kind of response you get - especially if he's in the same 'house' with us here. If this were the 1980's you'd probably get a benevolent message to leave things to him since he is running the centres. You say:
Quote:
It is not for me to decide how Raja Yogis account metaphysically and dogmatically for these mistakes. I am now external to that religion and I do not see how me taking a religious stance advances my cause. Indeed throwing my beliefs into the mix will waste further time and will distract further from the practical requirement to institute child protection. I don’t see how any possible answers to the many metaphysical and theological questions that might offer themselves to this problem make any difference to the proven need for adequate child protection.
Your whole report seems to contradict this position. You have expressed dismay and disgust at any doctrinal allusions to karmas and your reference to Kant is an indication of where your own values may be rooted. It is not a substitution of religious values that is needed but a basic position from which you evaluate and assess the position of the organization on this matter. You have already done so. It is the means by which you have come to publish the report. If you had not already questioned their fundamental authority then you would have been in the same position like those who would meditate the matter away. Furthermore, addressing those issues would remove the veil of infallibility and would disillusion potential victims because of the nature and power of indoctrination and authoritarian control inherent in the movement. Hence the theological question seems inextricible from your central concern because fundamentalist BKs are totally immersed in a theology that blinds them to all else. You seem to forget that that was the requirement from the inception of the yagye. It is only now in these 'revisionist' days that we see some inclination to 'think outside the box' but the organization as a whole remains essentially fundamentalist. So to say that:
Quote:
I personally am not interested in the metaphysical ‘how’. I am not saying it is not an interesting or valid question. I am simply saying that I am not interested in it.
seems a contradictory statement in light of your entire report. I hope I have sufficiently illustrated this. Finally, in view of your secular inclination in dealing with this matter I suggest you send a report to the American Family Foundation (AFF). Just place AFF in your search machine and you should get some links. Respectfully, Gyaniwasi _________________ "Those were the days my friend ...."
Atma Joined: 26 Feb 2004 Posts: 98 |
Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2004 10:21 pm Post subject: |
gyaniwasi, We have come to expect brilliance from you. Even so, I must say that your post (above) surpasses your - already high - standards. If I may revert to my bk-days vocab for a moment, permit me to say an admiration-filled "Wah wah!" Addressing eromain, you wrote:
Quote:
Sometime ago I attempted to address that issue in a post entitled "Messenger and the Message:The Seed and the Fruit". I'd like to see your response to it.
I would like to second that, and take it a little further. There is nothing more important than this child abuse issue. By bringing it to the fore, Eromain has done yeoman service. Kudos to him for that. That being said, I (and perhaps others also) feel that discussion of that vital issue need not be to the exclusion of other issues raised in this forum. I understand eromain's white hot concentration on child abuse. I have also seen how ably he discusses other issues, in his Report. For example, his rivetting analysis of the BK metaphysical caste system, for which he was justly given a Classic Post Award. I must confess some disappointment that he has, so far, not responded to other matters raised by xbks on this site. It may be a question of priorities, and there may also be an issue of available time. Still, I look forward to hearing his views on and reaction to the other important issues raised on this site. The same goes for T, assuming that he is now over the age of majority. I say that because Admin made a post saying members of XBKchat should be 18 and over. Once again, I commend you for your enlightening piece. It illuminates...without heat.
eromain Joined: 16 Jun 2004 Posts: 30 |
Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:40 am Post subject: post of the year??? |
gyaniwasi, wonderful stuff. you have given me and everyone else visiting here a great deal to think about. i am away for the next ten days or so -thankfully as i will need time to think up my reply but will reply after that. meanwhile i look forward to reading everyone else's response to your posting. regards eugene
eromain Joined: 16 Jun 2004 Posts: 30 |
Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:01 am Post subject: just before i go |
while i'm away i would love to hear other peoples comments (both x and current bks) on the question gyaniwasi raises as to the relevence of raja yoga theology and my attempts at prompting reform from outside the organisation. what do people think: do i need to take an ideological position on the role of 'God' in the BKs, or to put it another way is my report seriously flawed by an absence of comment on 'God''s supposed participation in the organisation?
Guest |
Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 6:51 pm Post subject: |
great response many things said I've been saying in a different way no other responses needed for me eromain imo, the report should leave all your own beliefs out including remarks on bk beliefs that sound subjective an objective outline of bk beliefs is sufficient to make your case
hanuman Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 174 |
Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 10:59 pm Post subject: Child Abuse In the BK |
Eromain, At this stage of your investigation, you will need to be in constant consultation with an attorney or jurist who has case expertise in the subject of your investigation. You will need a lawyer who has practical expertise in cases of child abuse in religious or spiritual organizations which are international. Those on the otherside may have already gathered a battery of jurists or have placed on the alert their lawyers. Child abuse or abuse period is not a light matter for any organization in the USA. _________________ Om Shanti, To my brothers and sisters. Love to you all, Errol bhai
Paul Joined: 13 Mar 2004 Posts: 72 |
Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:24 pm Post subject: |
eromain wrote:
while i'm away i would love to hear other peoples comments (both x and current bks) on the question gyaniwasi raises as to the relevence of raja yoga theology and my attempts at prompting reform from outside the organisation. what do people think: do i need to take an ideological position on the role of 'God' in the BKs, or to put it another way is my report seriously flawed by an absence of comment on 'God''s supposed participation in the organisation?
eromain, First of all, let me say that, in the quote above, you have shown a disarming humility. It has been rightly said that the most dangerous persons are those who feel that they are never wrong...or could never be wrong. I therefore congratulate you on 'stepping away from yourself', so to speak, and inviting others to have a say. Let me make a 'worldly' analogy. Recall that a former US President (which one now escapes me) had a plaque prominently placed on his desk, which read "The buck stops here". By that action he, as commander in chief, was stepping up to the plate to say "I am ultimately responsible". He was commended for that. That open and forthright position earned him the respect of many. So it should be with the BK organization. No one who has known the organization from the inside believes that the trance possessions are faked. Even those who have left understand that there is an entity who takes charge of Dadi Gulzar's body. That being - self identified as Shiva / Bapdada / Almighty God - is the helmsman of the movement. The BK following and - more importantly - the upper echelon, believe that being is GOD. They therefore feel that they must obey his edicts. For them, he is the father. And he is the BOSS. The directions and guidance come from him. It is true that he cannot be there on a regular or daily basis to micro manage things. However, the BKs are, in effect, his agents - doing their best to give reality to his vision. How then can we leave that being out of the picture? The fact that the being is incorporeal matters not. In essence, we are all spirit. I believe that, and so do most of us. Look at the word "radical". It means "affecting the foundation, going to the root". You need to be radical in your analysis. We cannot simply prune the leaves and branches of the tree. We must examine the root. If I may reverse the words of that Presidential plaque: "The buck (also) starts here". With highest regards, Paul
Display posts from previous:
| XBK Chat Forum Index -> XBK discussions | All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
Page 3 of 8
| You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group